#invalidating someone’s love for you is a no no in my book and I will forever find that line just incredibly uncool

[shiningshenanigans]

Is it bad that I can never have a crush on Aragorn or think of him as “the perfect picture of human masculinity” the way every other woman alive seems to… all because I relate too much to Eowyn, and will forever be ticked off at him for leading her on and then rejecting her?

I know it’s petty, but Faramir will forever be the superior man in my opinion. Girlfriend, you dodged a bullet and SCORED.

[sweettsubaki]

Usually it's not the reading per se but what comes with it:

if you're not fast enough, if you didn't understand something, if you couldn't focus ect.... some teachers won't give you the benefit of doubt or help you while others will downright humiliate you and scare you from touching a book forever. they often force you to read the way they want you to read and a lot of people think they cannot read well because of that.

That's why a lot of people are traumatized. They associate it with books because that's how they lived it.

Just because it was not traumatizing for you doesn't mean others don't have actual PTSD symptom from it.

You can encourage people to try new thing, to get out of their comfort zone without invalidating their life experience.

[monstersinthecosmos]

Just stating for the record that there's a lot of confusion about what asexuality is and isn't, and whether ace people can participate in sex, and if sex has to be penetrative.

Like not that it's my job to be your sex educator lmao but

Yes asexual people can have sex; this is about a lack of attraction, not a lack of libido or sexual dysfunction.

Of course sex does not have to be penetrative.

Being celibate is not the same as being asexual.

Asexuals can be attracted to people without wanting to fuck them, they can still experience romantic attraction or desire intimacy that is not sex.

If you want to dismantle ace themes/reads in your fandom of choice, please use textual points that are, in fact, truthful about what asexuality is and isn't. A book isn't less queer if the characters don't fuck. Queer people can still experience love and romance without sex. This need to insist that a piece of media isn't ace because it's queer is saying that asexuals aren't queer, and we're not here for exclusionary radfem bullshit okay?

If we're going to preach this in the larger conversation of queer politics when it comes to, for example: trans rights, queer content in children's' libraries, existing in public--we have to be consistent. Don't tell the larger world that every facet of a queer person's life isn't about SEX but then tell ace people that they're not queer because they don't want sex, or dismiss a queer piece of media because the characters didn't fuck. Asexuality is not queer subtext, it is queer text. It is already queer.

If you're thinking about dunking on ace people in your fandom, like, listen! We know that tumblr has a radfem & conservative problem lol so like if you're just a radfem/terf/conservative/whatever I can't stop you, but if you don't associate with those folks and still want to be exlusionary, please check some resources to see if your understanding of asexuality is up to date before you make a bunch of points that don't matter. I really recommend AVEN - The Asexuality Visibility & Education Network and The Trevor Project's page about Asexuality as a starting point!

Just ask, before you post:

Does the asexual read hurt anybody?

Am I invalidating someone's experience by telling them that they're wrong?

Does my point balance strictly on concepts of sex, and not concepts of attraction?

Am I sure I understand what asexuality is before I start dunking on it and being exclusionary to the ace people in my fandom?

Am I regurgitating points about what sex is and isn't without remembering that asexuality is about sexual attraction, and not about whether or not someone participates in sex acts? (ie: "They do have sex, someone got a handjob" isn't really building your case the way you think it is.)

What exactly is the purpose of my post if it's not to be exclusionary and fucking rude? Do I need to examine my own biases towards ace people?

[im-so-normal-iswear]

Hi!! I love your writing!! Would it be possible for your thoughts on Ford/stan with a girlfriend who is a therapist or psychiatrist? (I’m studying psychology so this is a totally self indulgent ask!) thank you!! 🫶🏼

A/n: Ok! I'm sorry these took long

Stan/Ford pines x therapist!reader

Ford Pines:

Ford is instantly intrigued by your profession. He’s always been interested in how the human brain works, and having a girlfriend who understands the mind on such a deep level excites his curiosity.

He loves asking you questions about psychology, sometimes treating your discussions like he’s learning from a textbook.

“So, if someone were to experience prolonged exposure to isolation, how do you think that would affect their psyche?”

Ford absolutely loves to hear your insights on everything from mental health to obscure psychological theories, often adding his own knowledge of psychology.

Ford greatly values your calming presence. As someone who has gone through trauma from his interdimensional travels, Ford finds comfort in how you can guide him through his anxieties and ground him during his moments of overthinking. It’s not that he’s asking for therapy, but the way you talk and listen to him brings him a lot of peace.

Sometimes Ford gets lost in his head, overanalyzing everything or diving too deep into his research, and you’re the one who pulls him back. You know just how to approach his worries without invalidating them, and he’s beyond grateful for that.

“You always know exactly what to say to bring me back to reality. How do you do it?”

He’s particularly interested in your take on the psychological impact of interdimensional travel or exposure to anomalous phenomena.

He’ll often turn to you for discussions about the mind’s adaptability and resilience. You’ve become his go-to person for talking about the human condition in the context of the strange.

Ford is also incredibly supportive of your career and education. If you’re studying or need quiet time to work, he’ll make sure you have the perfect environment to focus. He’s always ready to offer encouragement when you’re feeling stressed.

“I know it’s a lot, but if anyone can do this, it’s you. I’ve never seen someone so dedicated to understanding the complexities of the mind.”

Ford loves sharing intellectual moments with you, like reading papers or discussing recent psychological studies. Sometimes, he even helps you with your work by giving you unique perspectives from his travels, and in turn, you help him manage the more stressful parts of his past.

Stan Pines:

Stan doesn’t fully get what a therapist or psychiatrist does at first (he’s used to handling things by “toughing it out”) but he quickly comes to appreciate how insightful you are.

“So, you talk to people about their problems? Gotta hand it to ya, you’ve got a lot of patience. I can barely deal with the customers.”

Stan is amazed at how you can listen to other people’s issues all day and still come home well. He’s constantly in awe of how much you care for others and how you help people through their darkest moments.

“You’ve gotta be some kinda saint to listen to people’s problems all day and not go crazy yourself.”

He loves that you don’t push him to talk, but when he does, you listen attentively. You’ve taught him that it’s okay to share his feelings without making him feel weak. Sometimes he’s caught off guard by how much better he feels after talking to you.

“Huh, I guess it’s not so bad… all this feelings stuff. You really know how to make a guy feel better.”

Stan appreciates your ability to see through his tough-guy act. You can read him like a book, and while it’s a little intimidating, it’s also a relief. You pick up on the small things, like when he’s more stressed than usual or when something’s bothering him.

“How do you always know what’s goin’ on in my head? It’s like you’re a mind reader or somethin’. Say how bout we put that to use in the shack? I'm joking, unless you want to.”

He loves to brag about your career, even if he doesn’t always understand it.

“Yeah, my girl’s a therapist. Helps people sort out their problems. She’s smart as hell. I dunno how she does it, but it’s pretty impressive.”

If you’re ever feeling overwhelmed by your work, Stan is the first to encourage you to take a break. He might not know all the details of your job, but he knows how important it is for you to recharge. He’ll pull you away from your books or laptop and suggest watching a movie or doing something fun together.

“You’ve been workin’ hard all day. Come on, let’s kick back and relax. You deserve it.”

He’s a little protective of you, especially if you’ve had a rough day. If you come home stressed after dealing with a difficult client, Stan will be there to comfort you in his own way, whether that’s making you laugh, cooking a simple meal, or just sitting beside you.

Stan will occasionally ask for advice, though he’ll frame it casually. “So, let’s say someone I know has a lotta stuff from their past they don’t like talkin’ about. What’d you say to help ‘em out?” He trusts you more than he’ll admit and values your wisdom, even if he’s not always ready to face his own feelings head-on.

A/n: you give them therapy they need, the end ^^

[maxdibert]

“Sirius killed people-“ so did Snape, supposedly loved Lily but betrayed her location to Voldemort because he was jealous of James actually winning her heart, not to mention convincing Harry the abuse was his fault, nearly giving Neville PTSD to the point where his boggart was Severus Snape himself, being a racist pos to anyone born of muggle parents, and becoming a high ranking member of the death eaters so what? He could protect Harry?

“It’s easier to cry in a Ferrari-“

it’s easier to defend a terrible character and play the racism and eat the rich card when you can’t understand context and inference clues that JK Rowling laid out.

What’s easy is inventing canon. What a load of made-up nonsense, mate.

1. Learn to read. I didn’t say Sirius killed anyone, but he did attempt murder. And he did it because he thought it was funny to torture Severus.

2. There’s no evidence that Severus killed anyone before Dumbledore asked him for euthanasia. This is made quite clear when Dumbledore talks about his concern for Draco’s soul, and Severus immediately questions him about his own soul. If Severus is so worried about it, it’s implied he hadn’t killed anyone before—or at least not in cold blood.

3. Have you even read the books? The only person who knew the Potters’ location was Peter. He’s the one who betrayed them.

4. There’s no evidence he was a racist. First off, equating racism with the concept of blood purity not only trivializes a serious social issue but also makes it clear that some of you have no idea what racism is or its history. The discriminatory dynamics and their foundations are completely different. But anyway, putting that aside, there’s no evidence whatsoever that Severus discriminated against Muggle-borns. The only time he makes a comment is during the incident with Lily—which, conveniently, happens when James and Sirius are sexually assaulting him, and Lily seems to smile at James. I don’t think you can judge someone’s ideology based on a comment made in an extremely tense moment. Canonically, Severus doesn’t treat Muggle-born students worse in class or make comments about their heritage. Nor does he badmouth Muggles. At most, he makes condescending remarks—which, let’s be real, all the characters do, even the “good ones,” because they’re ridiculously patronizing toward Muggles.

5. Severus was literally a double agent and reached the highest ranks of the Death Eaters to, yes, protect Harry. That’s literally why. He’s following Dumbledore’s orders. Like, have you read the books, or are you just pulling this stuff from fanfics? 99% of what you’ve said so far is pure fantasy, mate.

6. Yes, love, it’s actually pretty easy for me to defend people whose actions are a direct consequence of their life circumstances, and whose poor decisions were directly influenced by a lack of opportunities, security, and the violence of their environment. In fact, that’s literally my job. That’s what I do for a living.

Look, I don’t give a damn if you’re a Sirius fangirl. You can love a character while admitting he was a massive piece of crap. I love The Penguin, and there’s no way to justify him at all. Like, it’s fine, you know? You also have every right to feel sorry for him—I’m not going to judge you for that or anything. I’m not invalidating other people’s feelings if they think Sirius’s life was super tragic and feel a lot of compassion for him. Everyone has their own feelings and points of empathy. But that’s not the case for me. I don’t feel sorry for him. There’s no excuse for being an abusive bully with sociopathic tendencies toward someone who was canonically in a position of social and economic disadvantage. If Severus had come from a good family, with money and power—or if Sirius had been someone without a name, wealth, or status—then I’d view the situation differently because they would have been on equal footing. But just like the Black family chose Muggle-borns to torture because they knew they could, Sirius chose Severus because he knew he could. He’s a hypocrite and a piece of garbage. At least Bellatrix admitted her tendencies.

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

Yo! Good morning/evening, hope you are fine^^💝. I wanted to ask you a question but I was afraid that it may bother you or something (you know..that feeling when you are scared that you might disturb someone or being an unwelcome person) but yeah I will ask you since i was serious about your answer for some time now so I hope I'm not annoying you or something *feel free to answer only if you wish^^. You seem to know the characters pretty well, you are quite capable and great at reading and understanding them, one of the things I'm serious about is what do you think would make someone qualified enough to be with malleus? Do they have to be of the same species?certain Reputation, stature or traits?(sorry can't help it since I can't rest until I know everything about what interests me and figure it all out😅). Thanks for giving me some of your precious time I really like your blog, you're amazing💜

No worries, you’re not bothering me at all ^^ I love to talk about my hyperfixations www

Now, I know a lot of fans (particularly on the EN side) like to ship Malleus with their OC and especially with Yuu so I want to first make it clear that my response is NOT meant to invalidate those Malleus shippers. Whatever I say here is based on my own interpretation of canon lore (and let’s be real here, TWST won’t ever confirm if anyone is romantically interested in Yuu because it might not work with how some players view their own relationship with that character). In fanon, anyone can be with anyone, but in canon there are very specific in-universe rules and expectations laid out for Malleus so these are what I will be referring to.

I also want to emphasize that the final traits I discuss in this post do NOT reflect Malleus’s personal tastes or views. He has little say in what kind of an individual his spouse would be, so his own preferences are not speculated about or taken into account here. The traits I will be bringing up are based on what I believe the lore implies are the desirable traits for those marrying into the Draconia royal family.

We got it? Good 👍 Read more below the cut!!

Firstly, I’m completely disregarding the ideas of “Malleus can love whoever he wants to love”, “Malleus can scare people into accepting who he loves”, and/or “Malleus can change the law so he can marry who he loves” (a la Sultan from Aladdin or through some other Disney magic or logic). Here’s why:

In general, those solutions for “high stakes issues” are too simple, and that has never been how Twisted Wonderland tackles complicated problems. Just look at every single OB boy’s backstory. They’re so complex that they aren’t totally resolved by the end of their books; these problems persist and are long term things each of them are working on addressing. This is also true of the politics TWST introduces to us; Leona for example explains how there is social pushback and resistance to the idea of infrastructure reform because the culture of the Sunset Savanna stresses harmony with nature. This has made it difficult for them to adopt new technologies because real politicians in their world have to seriously weigh their cultural values with their health and societal progress. The only time there are really easy solutions are in events or vignettes where the emotional stakes are not super high, but who Malleus marries is, in fact, super important since this will entirely change the life of a main character and his country.

With that first bullet point in mind… No, Malleus cannot love whoever he wants to love. Certainly, he may feel affection for another but he can never truly be with them. He is royalty and the only heir to the throne of Briar Valley. It follows that he is expected to marry for political reasons/to better his nation. This is a non-negotiable obligation for him.

Rather than saying, “Malleus cannot scare people into accepting who he loves”, I think it’s more accurate to say Malleus knows he probably shouldn’t. I mean, yes, he may be upset about his S/O not being accepted by his people but I feel that is discrediting a lot of the loyalty he has for his own country. As a kid he may have thrown tantrums when he was upset and potentially harmed staff, but as a 178 year old he has a much better understanding of decorum and maintaining it in spite of his own grudges. For example, even though he personally dislikes Leona he still commands Sebek to apologize to him because, at the end of the day, this could harm Briar Valley’s relationship with the Sunset Savanna. That’s not to say that Malleus can’t be petty (he definitely is)—but implying he would be petty toward basically his entire country just because they would disapprove of the one he loves?? (We know this would likely be true because Sebek’s parents faced similar backlash when they got together.) I feel like his own sense of awareness and responsibility for his country, crown, and people would override that. As an example, Malleus states that he has never been in a car before because the senate would be against it and often kept Malleus in the castle. Someone of his power could easily ignore them and sneak out and do whatever he wanted, yet the dialogue implies Malleus didn’t. He obeyed his political advisors even when he was younger and arguably much more immature. Malleus might not like certain decisions made about his life but it sounds like he ultimately complies with them.

Continuing from the previous point, let’s say for the sake of argument that Malleus does scare everyone into line. What about his public image and the mental health of his S/O? Maybe Malleus can frighten people to not talk out of turn to his face, but he cannot control what people whisper about him behind closed doors or to treat his S/O well or like they actually like them. Not only would they be alienated (away from their own home and forced to adapt to a new one) but they’d be treated oddly by others too. What kind of reputation is that for Malleus? To be a tyrant king who throws a hissy fit anytime someone talks about his partner in a way he doesn’t approve of? With a spouse who is not at their best mentally because of the constant ostracization? (This is similar to what Leona experienced in his childhood.) I don’t think Malleus would want to subject anyone to that kind of life, especially not one he loves. And again, this attitude would be the vast majority of his people. It’s not like it can be avoided or resolved in an easy manner, especially when the people of Briar Valley have proven to be against change.

Lastly, Malleus would not change the law so he can be with whoever he wants to. To begin with, I doubt this is a unilateral position the senate would approve of. But okay, let’s accept that Malleus is royalty so his power overrides the advisors’ power. So he effectively just changed a law for a very selfish and personal reason rather than changing something to actually benefit his people. That doesn’t feel in-character for him, not when Malleus seems to understand that it is the duty of those in higher status to help those below them rather than themselves (see: Riddle’s Suitor Suit vignettes. Malleus has acted selfish before, yes (who remembers Endless Halloween Night? His Dorm Uniform vignettes? I do.)—but never at the cost of changing the status quo of his country. (Book 7 is not included here because he’s in a very distressed emotional state then; this “new law” scenario posits that Malleus is in a normal state of mind.) This is a major change—change which Briar Valley, its people, and most importantly, Malleus, are not ready for. You think there wouldn’t be social pushback against this? From a society that has become complacent with its own way of life and is still isolated from the rest of the world? That Malleus, someone who struggles greatly with accepting life changes himself, could enact such a big change so easily? (On a more technical level, you don’t just pass a law and it instantly becomes tangible or real, there is a process of approval and then implementation.)

Additionally, it’s made clear in Ghost Marriage that “[Malleus] cannot enter into an engagement lightly”, which is why Sebek goes in his place. Eliza, the Ghost Bride, is royalty (er, albeit dead) but it seems that royal status is not enough to qualify as his partner. Maybe this is because she’s dead and doesn’t have anything of value for Briar Valley (no land, no people, no political power), but it could also mean that the partner has to be given the thumbs up by other parties.

All that being said, here are some of the conditions I think would have to be met for Malleus’s future spouse:

Has to be someone of equal or at least high status. This means they also have to be a royal or at least of nobility. This appears to be true of Malleus’s dad, who is referred to as a duke.

Because of how self-contained Briar Valley is + nocturnal fae having beef with diurnal fae, I imagine his partner would have to also be a nocturnal fae. This would also solve the MASSIVE lifespan difference between fae and non-fae because at least fae would be far closer to each other even if their lifespans fluctuate but subspecies.

Someone suited to rule by his side. Being married into any royal family is no joke—it comes with the expectation that you will contribute somehow, and the partner should be fully equipped to enter the world of politics with him.

Piggybacking off the last point, I think mental fortitude is also a prerequisite. This is because being a politician (navigating the social climate both within your country and outside of it, keeping your people and colleagues happy, maintaining public approval, managing laws, dealing with potential attempts on your life, etc.) can be very stressful and can hurt those who are faint of heart or not prepared for the responsibility. Leaders have to make tough calls at the drop of a hat, and they have to be ready for it.

Has a lot to offer in terms of benefits to Briar Valley as a country. This could be in terms of resources, connections, and/or political savvy. This appears to be true of Malleus’s dad, who acted as a diplomat for Briar Valley.

Vetting and formal approval from the senate. lmao good luck with that

Has to be able and willing to have a child. They at least need an heir to the throne to succeed Malleus. (However, knowing how exclusionary and conservative as heck the senators are, I doubt they would accept anything but a biological child 💀)

Preferably someone with powerful magic or is skilled at magic already so as to lessen the chance of “tainting” the bloodline with a weak mage or a non-mage.

I believe that Briar Valley would prefer someone with old fashioned values like them, not someone pushing for massive reform. They have a culture that is resistant to change and a history of fighting for resources with outsiders, so if Malleus’s new spouse tries to introduce a bunch of technology or open its borders to other countries (even if they have good intentions), the people + the senate may oppose them. His father is implied to be open-minded, but he at least understood that such change isn’t reasonable without time and effort dedicated to the endeavor.

All that being said 💦 I think that this topic is actually less about what Malleus as an individual wants and what his country, his people, and, yes, even his asshole senators, want. This is basically an arranged marriage situation so that their country can maintain power and relevance. It’s about the collective and what Malleus must do for their perceived security and prosperity.

[brawlingdiscontent]

I've been seeing a lot of Armand discourse lately about different interpretations of him and which are wrong and unreasonable and why - and one thing I'm not seeing reflected is the utter ambiguity of his character as presented by the TV show.

We start off thinking he's a totally different dude and then all of a sudden he's like "PSYCH I'm the vampire Armand!" and Louis' like: "you know that guy I've been mooning about for the past seven episodes? The love of my life is actually this other guy!" What does the audience do in this case? Do we believe Louis? Do we mistrust him given his false memories that Daniel's just exposed?

The show doesn't give us Armand's POV, we only see other characters' perspectives of him, including Daniel's one of suspicion, and Louis' which fluctuates and is defined by inconsistencies. We know what he says about himself, but also from the moment he appears as Armand, in the very act of appearing the show frames him as a liar (or at the very least, someone who may engage in deceptive practices/be withholding something)! And this confusing ambiguity is only validated by the story as it goes on, including 2.5 and the twist in 2.8. Did Armand mess with a significant chunk of Louis' memories without his consent? Possibly! Did he only alter the end of the 1973 altercation and only because Louis asked him to? Also possibly! Did he always love Louis and never intended to manipulate him and this was all an unfortunate tragedy? Could be! Was he hung up on Lestat and insincere and manipulative with Louis from the start? OR pining after Daniel all of these years? Maybe!

And bringing out evidence to support any one interpretation of Armand's motives or beliefs is complicated because as the show (and 2.8 in particular) has demonstrated, this evidence could be later redacted/invalidated!

Absolutely there's an argument to be made for nuance, which the show tends to present us with, and for duality, the "both and-" which rings true to the complexity of the characters it constructs: Armand could be manipulative AND traumatized AND sincere in his intent all at the same time!

While some outcomes are less likely, there's so much about Armand that we simply can't definitively confirm until/unless the show more explicitly addresses this from Armand's and/or a detached, 'objective,' third-person POV. Sometimes folks have extra insight from the books/behind the scenes, but I also think it's a totally fair viewing experience to take what's being presented to you at face value without doing extra research (and in this case the show presents multiple possibilities).

I'm obviously not talking about racist takes here (and things get trickier when we're talking about patterns of responses that may be strongly informed by biases), and the most extreme takes can feel a bit far-fetched, but in general there are so many interpretations of the character that can't be definitively claimed to be wrong.

'How can you interpret him as x?' Pretty easily, actually. He is ambiguous! inscrutable! (And while this runs the danger of an Orientalist framing, I think the show avoids this as it seems to argue that he's not these things because he's Asian-- but because he's Armand! - and also because of the vagaries of the show's particular chosen storytelling devices).

TL;DR: Re: Armand, there is so much that the show has yet to clearly define about the character, making many possible interpretations valid. In the meantime, maybe the only thing we can agree on is that he didn't give a shit about Claudia!

(P.S. that last line is a joke!)

[yazthebookish]

This might be a bit long but the Gwynriel Reddit thread inspired me to let my thoughts flow about Gwyn and Azriel.

P.s. this will include some HOFAS spoilers.

I've said this before but SJM choosing to end Azriel's chapter with Gwyn is a choice. It's the beginnings and the endings of a chapter that authors tend to put a lot of thought into—so her ending the chapter which felt like her nudging readers' to Gwyn's direction is intentional.

Gwyn was not just a random addition, given their interactions throughout ACOSF their scene in the bonus chapter didn't feel out of place (even if readers' didn't expect to see her in it).

People try to invalidate the bonus chapter as much as they can but HOFAS had proved once again that they are important and canon (though I do think SJM and her publisher need to include these in the main books because they are crucial).

"You depend so much on a bonus chapter that a lot of readers don't have access to"

True but that doesn't mean the next book can't fill in the blanks because Azriel and Gwyn were already interacting in ACOSF, so having that romantic development in the next book (and the possible reveal that they're mates) + ON PAGE will still make it up for the readers that never read the bonus chapter. Like, CC4 will definitely bring up the fact that Ruhn and Lidia got married (despite it happening in a bonus).

I always considered the bonus chapter as a teaser for what will happen in the next book, Sarah confirmed she sprinkled little crumbs and I quote "I want to hear all your theories after you read the book and his [Azriel's] bonus scene, the crumbs have all been scattered, little bread crumbs everywhere" and it will keep readers guessing until the next book is out. So you won't know for sure how relevant or significant the bonus chapter is and the crumbs she scattered until you read the next book.

With that being said, Gwyn's cameo in the bonus chapter didn't come without some interesting clues: Azriel's shadows didn't warn him she was around, they were curious about her and she smiled at them, they danced and sang around her, Azriel revealed he sings because she asked, she thanked him with a smile and he felt settled even his shadows calmed.

We never saw his shadows react to anyone the way they did with Gwyn. They seem drawn to her, they danced, they sang, and while there are many theories about it but I absolutely do think if the shadows would be drawn to someone it would be Azriel's mate.

"Azriel and Gwyn had no romantic development and he didn't think about kissing her and all that"

But did every SJM couple start that way? No. And someone expressing the desire to kiss and hook up with someone is not always an indication of endgame (I can count multiple couples who kissed but weren't endgame).

The crumbs we had of them in ACOSF sets the groundwork for a romantic relationship to build in the next book—because who doesn't want to read about them both falling in love on page?

And yes, Sarah is capable of writing a love story from scratch in a single book (e.g., Tower of Dawn). Another example is how ACOMAF started with Feyre being in love with Tamlin and halfway through she started to really fall in love with Rhys.

The whole Azriel/Elain/Lucien triangle is messy as it is, so I don't think SJM would turn it into a square by inserting Gwyn. SJM could've chose not to give Gwyn and Azriel any ties in any way whether it was him rescuing her, him training the Valkyries, and again, including her in his own bonus chapter (hell even her boss:guardian Clotho made an appearance).

But she did and based on her pattern with her male love interests in particular, she doesn't really insert a new female or have females fight over the male love interest. I don't ever see Elain and Gwyn fight over Az, each might have an issue with Az on their own but do I see them argue with each other over Azriel? Absolutely not.

And if you look at the sequence of the scenes in his chapter, it gives a better idea of how it was planned:

1. Starts with Azriel reflecting on his loneliness while everyone left.

2. Elain shows up and they interact, Azriel gives her the necklace and they almost kiss.

3. Rhysand interferes and Az stops the kiss and tells Elain it was a mistake.

4. Az and Rhys argue and ends with Rhys ordering him to stay away from Elain and dismissing him.

5. Az leaves to the House of Wind wanting to work off the frustration but finds that Gwyn already occupied the training ring.

6. Gwyn and Az interact and he leaves the scene feeling settled down and his shadows calmed.

7. He wakes up, goes to the River House and finds Elain's necklace, he pockets it with the intention of returning it to the shop after the snowball fight.

8. Instead of the shop, he goes to the library to ask Clotho to give the gift to Gwyn and refuses to leave with it.

9. Going back and forth, Clotho eventually agrees and said she will tell Gwyn a friend gave it to her and she thanks Az for the joy it will bring to Gwyn.

10. Az leaves but the mention of Gwyn's joy sparked something in him that it brought a slight smile to his face, he buried the image in his chest where it glows quietly.

Both interactions with Elain and Rhys ended with him feeling miserable, but both interactions with Gwyn and Clotho ended with him feeling lighter and better—and to me that shows me how intentional SJM was with creating these parallels (including the shadows skittered back vs the shadows danced and sang).

Instead of Gwyn and Clotho we could've had Mor or Nesta or Amren, but SJM chose Gwyn and Clotho. Like, it could've ended after Rhys's argument but again, it's a writer's choice.

That's why no matter how many times I reread ACOSF my mind doesn't change much because SJM is not that subtle.

[flower-boi16]

Forgot to add, but Stolas basically guilt tripped him into doing it.

"The one who wants me is my first ever friend..."

Blitz was perfectly willing to just leave Stolas there tied up, but instead gave him pity sex.

Yeah sure...Blitz was the one to make it all about sex. No Stolas....no....that was ALL YOU! The only thing Blitz did was do a little bit of flirting and steal the book, he didn't make it about sex. From beginning to end, that was all you.

People like to defend this kind of shit with "Oh it's intentional because it's meant to show Stolas lacking self-awarness!", which is very funny because 1. You are actively acknoweledging that Stolas' perspective here is invalid and Blitz's is which goes against the whole idea that both sides are suppoused to be in the wrong and 2. The show is not calling this shit out and every time Stolas says something like this (The final scene in Full Moon and the begining of Apology Tour) it's never called out nor is it ever frammed as that, and in Apology Tour specifically it is very obvious that we are specifically suppoused to take Stolas' side here and see Blitz as purely in the wrong.

I also do need to acknowledge that there are people who think that Blitz's feelings are portayed as valid by the narrative. They are not. The final scene in Full Moon and the begining of Apology Tour have Blitz rant about Stolas being a prince and considering that Oops established that this is a bias Blitz has towards Stolas it is very clear that these scenes are intended to be read as Blitz being blinded by his biases against Stolas due to Stolas being a prince, and he's too consumed in his biases to see that Stolas has real feelings for him. That is how these scenes are being frammed and clearly how they are suppoused to be read.

So no, the show doesn't see Blitz's perspective as valid. There is that rant in the begining of AT where Blitzo awkardly spells out his self-hatred keeping him from believing that a prince could possibily love him but the rest of the episode frames Stolas as someone hurt by Blitzo's actions and Blitzo as an asshole who hurts others. So his self-loathing isn't really something that the episode really wants you to sympathize with, only as another reason for why Blitz struggles to see that Stolas loves him.

Blitzo isn't a character that the show wants you sympathize with in this situation; the point of the episode is Blitz realizing that he isn't a good person and he needs to change. That's not a set up for a sympathetic character.

The show is directly outlining people information like this yet people still make bullshit excuses for Viv's writting based on some tweets. Blitz's perspective is never treated as valid by the narrative at all, sure, it acknowledges that Stolas was wrong for making this deal in the first place, but that gets rendered moot because that's not the reason for why Blitz hates Stolas; Blitz hates Stolas because of a bias he had against royals that completely came out of nowhere in season 2 solely so the show could make him purely look like an asshole consumed by his biases.

The narrative doesn't see Stolas SAing Blitz as the reason he hates Stolas, rather it sees Blitz's bias being a reason for that. It doesn't actually look at Blitz's perspective and how Stolas' actions may have affected him, hell it shows that it doesn't even affect him at all!

It's another instance of the show demonizing the people who Stolas has hurt so it could make them look unreasonable and further woobify Stolas. It's made even worse with the implication in Apology Tour of Blitz gaining feelings for Stolas and since Blitz really wanted to fuck Stolas it's not unreasonable to assume that the show may go in the route of "Blitz liked being SA'd by Stolas but he was just too comsumed by his biases to realize it!" because then you are fully painting Blitz as an biased asshole and any argument that the show understands his perspective gets thrown out the window.

Stolas' feelings are treated as valid by the narrative, how hurt he feels that Blitzy doesn't love him, that Blitzy doesn't see that Stolas loves him back, that Blitzy is "making him uncomfortable". Meanwhile, the narrative purely treats Blitz's feelings about Stolas as completely invalid, not using Stolas SAing him as an reason for Blitz hating him but rather him being too comsumed by his own biases.

There's a strong inbalance here that makes the argument that the show wants us to see them both as in the wrong completely fall apart. Blitzo is treated as the problem by the narrative and the fandom, that he's hurting poor Stolas' feelings with how he's treating the bird boy. And here's the thing; Blitzo having this bias came out of nowhere. There as no hint of this in season 1 or the first five episodes of season 2, it was only until Oops where this thing came up. This was never shown to be a character trait Blitz had nor is there even any reason for it, why Blitz has these preconcieved notions about Stolas going in. It's because the writters pulled this out of their ass so they could have an easy way to make Blitzo look like a complete asshole. Nothing more.

It's further accentuated by the show using "tell don't show" in that scene, where we are told that Stolas did all these nice things for Blitz rather than shown, and not to mention these nice things do not line up with Stolas' behavior at all in season 1. It's all just completely and utterly lazy. It's a lazy way to make Blitz in the wrong here. It's a lazy way to absolve Stolas of his behavior again so the narrative could coddle him.

It's a lazy way for the show to pretend this relationship has naunce when it doesn't. Oh, and fans have the fucking gall to say "you don't understand the nuances" when people critisize this shit. Oh, I'm sorry, what naunces? This relationship isn't nuanced in the slightest; it's a victim and abuser relationship where the victim is strawmanned and portayed as wrong and the abuser is coddled and woobifyed. Whether it was intentional or not, that is how the relationship comes across as.

The show needs to see that BOTH perspectives are valid for the "their both in the wrong" thing to even work, but it doesn't. Blitz never gets any slack and Stolas is babyed. That is how this relationship is frammed. You can not ever convince me otherwise.

[badaziraphaletakes]

We've got a wriggly one

Love a good "Ooh I'm probably going to make myself unpopular here" at the opening of an offensive post. We're off to a very good start.

If you have to preface your take with four paragraphs of disclaimers explaining how not-ableist you are, then I Have Got Some News For You

"Before you accuse me of being ableist"... I have literally never heard this phrase not followed immediately by a giant ableism, and this is no exception

"I'm not." That's not how this works. It's something we all have to fight against every day. No one is just "not ableist". We all have ableist biases that we need to work hard to be aware of and keep in check. If you think you're just "not ableist", period, end of story, that's concerning in itself.

Disabled people can literally still be ableist (and saying otherwise is in itself ableist). We’re all products of an ableist society, so we all have structural internalized ableism inside us. Just because you are not aware that you’re doing it doesn’t mean it’s not happening. It can be unconscious. It very often is.

"I've been a disability advocate for years, so I'm entitled to tell other Disabled people how to feel about their own representation" quit weaponizing your Disabled identity to oppress other Disabled people, also, I can already tell I literally never want this person as my advocate, ever

7. The Autistics never, ever need or want alltistics to speak on our behalf, so if you're not Autistic then you are most welcome to shut absolutely and completely up at your earliest convenience

8. “This is as close as I can come to being gentle"... I have an alternative theory, which is that OP could, in fact, manage to be gentle if they really tried. For example, I do not have to be scathing right now in this reply. I am doing it because that is a choice I have actively made.

9. "I say things that people misunderstand" is never a defense. Most of the time, it's victim-blaming. And by the way, if this isn't a defense for Autistic people (spoiler alert: it's definitely not), then it sure as hell isn't a defense for alltistics.

10. "This isn't meant to invalidate people's opinions" *Spends the whole post invalidating people's opinions*

11. "Unless the book specifically says x, y, or z, you're not allowed to... say that something is ableist" umm wow

12. If Autistic people say a character (a character written by an Autistic author, no less) is Autistic-coded, then yelling "no they're not" at us is a very concerning thing for someone to be doing. To anyone doing this, just think about a. Why you feel the need to talk over Autistic people about that and b. why it bothers you to have people say that character is Autistic. Seriously, take some time and think about it. And also - if you can't see how Aziraphale is Autistic-coded - how did you miss that lol? Also also - how is thinking a character isn't Autistic your "personal experience" of that character that you feel the need to cling to? ...That gives me the ick.

13. Calling someone out for doing something ableist is not "name-calling".

14. "If someone read one of my [books?]..." I'm assuming this sentence ends "I wouldn't want people deciding one of my characters was x, y, or z". Well, guess what? - If it's a book you're finished with, then it's out of your hands what people do with it now. And if everyone from the autism community is saying your character is Autistic-coded, then guess what? Congratulations, you inadvertently (or, I suspect, advertently in NG's case ^^) wrote an Autistic-coded character! Seriously, take some time to read about what "coded" means and how characters are coded as Autistic. We're not saying Azi and the Starmaker are literally, conically Autistic. We're saying they're Autistic coded. And we’re saying he has autistic traits that autistic people identify with, and calling him selfish or cruel or lacking empathy or emotionally unintelligent (just a few of the common autism stereotypes that people have flung at Aziraphale) or things like that BECAUSE OF THOSE TRAITS is ableist.

When Aziraphale struggles socially and people call him selfish or stupid because of it, how am I (someonewho struggles socially every damn day) supposed to take that?

IN CONCLUSION: In trying to tell marginalized communities why we're wrong to think certain takes are offensive, people invariably end up just saying a bunch more offensive things - and in doing so, prove exactly the point we were trying to make in the first place.

[kathrahender]

"If you don't ship X ship you're an asshole"

"If you ship X you're an asshole"

"If you don't like X character you're the worst"

"If you like X character you're the worst"

"If you like this ship you're an abuse apologist"

"If you like this character you're a genocide apologist"

"This is a toxic ship, if you like it you support toxic couples irl"

"This is an evil character, if you like it you support abusers/murderers irl"

"If you like X character you support/like/accept what X does irl"

"If you like X pairing you support/like/accept X kind of pairing irl"

I'm tired of making posts about this topic but it seems like people don't understand it. Maybe If I continue making them people will eventually understand it. For the love of God. Stop with the toxicity. Stop with the harassment. Stop with the death threats. What do you think you will get harassing someone? What do you think you will get sending death threats? No, like, I'm seriously asking. What. the. fuck. do. you. think. you. will. get. A reward?

Because you're not gonna get a reward for leading someone to suicide.

First, if you feel the need to harass someone or tell them "kill yourself" for a fictional thing, your. opinion. is. invalid. "It's not invalid because I'm right!" "Oh, I'm right" "Oh, I'm the best" "Oh, I'm awesome" "Oh, I'm the best person here" "Oh, I'm the best human because I have morals unlike other people". Stop. Please, stop. You're so cringe. You are the "moral" person but you're telling a real person to kill themselves. Oops- my bad. Yeah, I realize now. That's actually the most moral thing in this world. Telling someone to kill themselves. How I didn't notice before? Tell someone "kys" is the best thing ever, it's not like you can break their heart, it's not like you can harm them irreparably, it's not like you can damage or shatter them, it's not like you can bring back their trauma (if they have), it's not like you can destroy completely a person for your unconsciousness and stupidity.

As I was saying- if you tell someone "kill yourself" "die" or harass them, you're opinion is invalid because no one with the ability of using reasonable arguments would act like that. It's the same as insulting someone. If you feel the need to call people "idiot" "asshole" "dick", that only proves you're not an intelligent person. If you were, you would be capable of talking about a topic without calling the other mean nicknames and/or without being rude to them.

Secondly, you have the right to like whatever ship you want. And you also have the right not to like a ship. But there's a difference between posting things like "You're fucking ill" "They have chemistry, you're an asshole if you don't ship them" "They're the best couple in this book/show/movie! You're the worst for not shipping them!" "If you like/don't like this couple is because you're a fucking idiot" "If you ship this, kill yourself" and posting things like "I don't like this ship because X, Y and Z" without being disrespectful to the people that like that ship. There's also a big difference between not liking what people ship/hating the ship and actively going into people blogs, into their asks, and into their posts, to harass them. You have the right not to like a ship. You have the right to like a ship. But people also have the right not to be harassed for a ship. And I don't understand why I even have to say that HARASSING SOMEONE OR TELLING THEM "KYS" is VERY VERY MUCH WORSE than liking a fanon/canon ship- WHEN YOU PEOPLE SHOULD FUCKING KNOW THAT ALREADY.

Thirdly, "If you don't like X character you're the worst" "If you like X character you're the worst". As well as you can ship whatever you want, you can like whatever character you want. You have the right to like whatever character you want without being called out, without being harassed, and without being told to kill yourself. And you have the right to like them BECAUSE IT'S A FUCKING CHARACTER. It's not real. Liking Voldemort or Vecna, for example, doesn't make you a murder apologist. Liking Endeavor doesn't make you an abuse apologist. Liking Darth Vader doesn't make you a genocide apologist. And I don't care about why you like them, but you can like them. Because again liking a FICTIONAL villain is not the same as liking a REAL villain. We would have a problem if you defended/supported REAL fascists, REAL murderers, REAL abusers, REAL dictators.

Disliking a character is also okay. Because guess what? Everyone has the right to have their own opinion about a character without people being rude at them. You have the right to dislike Harry Potter. You have the right to dislike Ginny Weasley. You have the right to dislike Draco Malfoy. You have the right to dislike whatever character you want. But of course it's not the same disliking a character for their personality or their behavior (or a similar reason) than disliking them because of their gender, their race, their sexual orientation, etc. If you dislike them because their personality annoys you, it's okay. It's not okay if you dislike them, for example, for being black. Above all things, you have to be a respectful human. And disliking a character for something like their race, gender or sexual orientation it's disrespectful.

Fourthly, if you don't want to see posts about the ship you dislike in Tumblr, there's something called FILTER TAGS. You know what I do when people post things about Percabeth / Hiccstrid / Jlaire / Adrinette / Westallen / Naruhina? You think I harass people who like those ships? You think I tell them "kys" because in my opinion they're not good ships? No. I FILTER the tag like a NORMAL, MORALLY and RESPECTFUL person would do. I don't go into Percabeth / Hiccstrid / Jlaire / Adrinette / Westallen / Naruhina blogs/posts to tell people "you're an asshole, why do you like this fucking ship? It's trash". And If I find a blog and I don't like them for what they have in their bio or because I can't stand the ships they like- I just block them. Because THE BLOCK BUTTON also exist. If you don't want to interact with someone, block them. But don't go into their blogs to harass them.

And you ALSO can do these things in AO3. You don't want to see works of a certain pairing? You don't want to see the works of a certain user? Then filter the tag and mute the user (1) instead of whining in other social media. "Why there are so many works of this couple? It's disgusting 😭😭😭" "The fandom worries me with this ship" "This ships is disgusting, why people like it so much?". Stop. Please stop. No one cares about what you're saying. You hate X ship? Then exclude the tag "X character/Y character" and search works of your favorite couple. It's so easy. (Yeah- I know I made a post about Ereri and Jeaneren, but with the post I meant I wanted more Jeaneren works, I didn't mean I wanted all the Ereri fics to dissapear or that I wanted people not to ship Ereri).

In fifth place, I have to say that your actions are very -like Palpatine would say- ironic. Yeah, it's ironic how you criticize people for liking "toxic/abusive" ships (like Catradora, Bakudeku, Reylo, Dabihawks, Zutara and Darklina, when they aren't even toxic because most of the times they're enemies to lovers ships) (2), while not worrying about ACTUAL canon toxic ships (like Jarley, Hannigram, Maiko, Anidala, and more) and while getting to the point of harass people for that """""toxic""""" ship. I don't know, but I think the only toxicity here comes from you.

"They're toxic" "They're abusive" "Their dynamic is horrible, it's so toxic and abusive" "I used to ship them but now I see how morally wrong is the ship" "If you ship this you're normalizing abuse" "I hate when people make it seem like a healthy ship". No. You're the toxic person here. You're the abusive person here. You're the wrong one here. You're the one normalizing abuse by not allowing people to like the ship they want and by making excuses to harass people. And btw- we don't make it seem like a healthy ship- because Catradora and Reylo, for example, only ended up together AFTER villain's REDEMPTION. It's not a toxic ship if we don't see the toxicity in their romance. I repeat it: in their ROMANCE. And like I said in a previous post, even if it was a toxic ship, no one has the right to harass someone for it. "No, they deserve to be harassed because they are toxic and that means they support toxic couples in real life". WHAT YOU LIKE IN FICTION IS NOT A REFLECTION OF WHAT YOU SUPPORT IN REAL LIFE, AND AGAIN, I CAN'T BELIEVE I HAVE TO SAY THIS WHEN YOU ALREADY SHOULD KNOW IT. And you aren't the most appropiate person to talk about toxicity-

And to end this post, it's funny how you throw hands the moment someone criticize your ship or your favorite character, acting like you're the morally superior person here. Acting like you're the best. Acting like you deserve good things because you're "right" and everyone else deserve bad things because they're "wrong". You know what? If your favorite characters were here, if Harry Potter, Ginny Weasley, Ron Wealey, Hermione Granger, Percy Jackson, Annabeth Chase, Katara, Aang, Marinette Dupain-Cheng and Adrien Agreste (and other characters) lived in this world, trust me, they wouldn't treat you with "respect" for defending them and defending their ship (Hinny, Romione, Percabeth, Kataraang, Adrinette and other ships). If you were/are respectful, sure, they would treat you nicely. Oh, but if you told someone to kill themselves, harrassed them, or doxxed them for their ship- they would be SO disappointed with you and your fandom. And trust me, they definitely wouldn't be on your side because THEY are HEROES and GOOD PEOPLE unlike you.

If you're against something I said, if you're against me being against harassment/being against sending death threats, block me now because I'm tired of people defending something so disgusting.

(1) If you silence a user in AO3 their works don't appear in the Search. You see this:

(2) I made a post about the """""toxicity""""" of some enemies-to-lovers ships (which is none), if you want to read it, read this and this or search for the tag "enemies to lovers" in my blog.

[carriesthewind]

I watched Jenny Nicholson's new video on disney's failed Star Wars hotel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0CpOYZZZW4), and there is some absolutely *fascinating* mental processes on display on the galactic starcruiser subreddit.

While many people are responding reasonably, some die-hard fans over there are spouting the absolutely unhinged, reality-denying, victim-blaming talking points she discusses in her video. There are several people who seem really invested in not just disagreeing with her, but insisting that she is not only objectively wrong but a bad-faith hater.

So I picked one of these people at random and scrolled back to try and see what their experience of the hotel was.

[Rambling musing below the cut. Unedited because I'm typing this because I can't get to sleep.]

Unsurprisingly, they insisted it was magical and life-changing and one of the best experiences anyone could have. However, these declarations of how important it felt to them were accompanied by no specifics about what about the experience was actually so great (with one exception, which I'll get to in a minute). Their very first post was about how they couldn't articulate why experience felt special.

I have some theories.

First, as Jenny alludes to in her video, there is a psychological pressure to justify the value in something a person has already invested so much money and time into. At one point, the redditor describes waiting on the phone on hold for two hours just to book an *add-on* for their trip. And as she says, the feeling of judgment from others only adds to this pressure. The redditor outright states that they feel uncomfortable saying they went to the hotel (outside the fan groups) because of how people react.

But I think it's more than that. As Jenny describes in her video (and as the redditor's description of their own experience matches), the experience was exhausting and overstimulating. The redditor describes being overwhelmed and overbooked, but also says they feel like they should have skipped out on sleep because they feel like they missed thing. And then, at the end of the second day - a literal 16 hour day of activities - there is a big finale, starting with an adrenaline-triggering "alarm," where you watch a cool live fight in the midst of a hundred other cheering, excited people. And this is the one positive specific that the redditor describes (multiple times, in fact!). They aren't a big fan of the sequels, but they "gasped when Rey showed up" in the finale. This isn't surprising at all! They were watching a live show while in a suggestible state and experienced an adrenaline rush, and their brain processed this as a magical experience.

This is reinforced by the redditor's descriptions of their nostalgia. They talk frequently about wishing they were in the hotel and wanting to return. But they specifics of what they miss are either vague or signifiers of the emotional experience (e.g. talking about how they miss the smell...because it reminds them of the hotel). And at one point, they mention that they miss the pre-trip anticipation almost as much as they miss the hotel itself.

This is a huge tip off that their interpretation of their experience was completely disconnected from the reality of the hotel. Whatever made the experience feel magical for them (whether or not I'm correct about my suspicions as outlined above), it had very little to do with any disney did or the actual quality of the hotel.

To be clear, I'm not invalidating the redditor's experience - if they say it felt life-changing and they don't regret what they spent, I believe them! I love all sorts of things in ways not reflected by any "objective" quality.

HOWEVER. I can also admit that! If someone criticizes something flawed that I love, it's not a personal attack on me! And my love for it isn't an justification for a) contributing to a narrative to encourage people to massively overpay for it and b) attacking people who didn't care for it and blame them for "doing it wrong"!

Especially - and here's the most interesting part - if I have many of the same criticisms of the thing myself.

Because while the redditor has only one specific about what made the experience great, they actually include lots of specifics about their experience. It's just that those specifics are all flaws. Here are some details of their experience as they actually describe it:

There were not enough character actors for them to actually interact with them meaningfully

The setup of the role play made them feel horrible social anxiety for a large chunk of the first day

They were forced to miss at least one major story event because of poor scheduling by the app/disney

Describing being randomly shown story beats disconnected of their actions within the roleplay/game (but describing it as 'I don't know how we accomplished that')

Nearly crying at one point because they were effectively locked out of a story moment

Wasting over an hour trying to figure out how to do a minor quest b/c of poor design

The experience the redditor actually describes is of a fairly-poorly designed, overcrowded larp that made them anxious, exhausted, and at times actively miserable, but ended with a really great adrenaline high. All of these things are objectively bad, and they all match onto Jenny's criticism.

But the redditor subjectively looks back at their experience as wonderful and magical. And so they are angry at Jenny, even though her criticisms map neatly onto their own experience, because she frames them as problems with the hotel. They seem to feel a pressure to defend their subjective experience by rejecting the possibility of any other interpretation of the experience, even the objective bad experiences of others.

In one of their most recent (of many) angry posts about how disingenuous Jenny is, they say, "For me, there's no reason to relitigate the debates surrounding the cruiser. We are more than happy to enjoy our memories from the time and let the rest of the "haters" just wallow in their hatred."

Three sentences earlier, they described how they used some of their precious time inside the magical hotel to try to prove she was lying about not being able to see the dinner show because she was placed behind a column.

The redditor cannot simply enjoy their memories from the time. Because even in the middle of their experience, they were forceably attempting to prove that all the money and time and expectations they invested *must* have been objectively worth it. Jenny's video is threatening because the redditor cannot pretend that they just had different experiences, that Jenny got unlucky while the redditor got lucky and had fun.

After coming home they feel unhappy, which *must* be because the experience was so good that they are dissatisfied returning to their 'normal life'. The anxiety, the wasted time, even the tears? Those weren't the experience, the experience was the adrenaline rush at the very end. It was life-changing. It was magical. It was worth it. All of it was worth every penny. It had to be.

[luizd3ad]

Every Step Of The Way | Regulus Black x Reader

ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ࣪˖⤷ .𖥔 ݁ ˖ ࣪ ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ˖ ⤷

Pairing: Regulus Black x GN!Reader WC: 1,213 CW: heavy talks of depression, depressive episode, depressed reader, self invalidation, no use of Y/N. Author's Note: I've been having a hard time lately and I just needed a comfort fic, this is purely based off my own experience with depression and how I feel when I'm in a depressive episode. If you don't feel like me that's okay, mental health is different for everyone! Just remember you're so valid and so loved <3. Summary: You're just having a hard time but Regulus is always there for you.

⨯ . ⁺ ✦ ⊹ ꙳ ⁺ ‧ ⨯. ⁺ ✦ ⊹ . * ꙳ ✦ ⊹

At some point your mind wasn't supposed to be your enemy anymore right? At some point the ‘teen angst’ was supposed to go away and you were supposed to be an adult with relatively healthy mental health right?

The crippling depression and anxiety was supposed to go away with puberty. At least that's what you'd been told, that things would get better and your mind wouldn't mess with you as much.That was what was supposed to happen, but when do things ever go as planned?

The only difference between now and your teen years was that you recognized the symptoms faster, you understood what was coming before it was fully there. Now every so often you can catch it, do things to make the bad thoughts go away or lessen, then other times… you would feel paralyzed.

The numbness would consume you, invite you in like an old friend, along with the loss of appeal to do anything. You didn't want to eat, drink, read, or listen to music. 

You didn't want to do anything and sometimes without even realizing you would spent the whole day looking into nothingness. 

Regulus would notice the mood change almost immediately. He would pick up on the sign and the overall change in your personality.

Not only would he notice because he was hyper aware of the behavioral changes around him (thank you Walburga. Sarcasm) but also because he dealt with the same feelings. 

The emptiness and numbness of it all, it wasn't until Pandora explained it to him that he learned that those feelings were not exactly ‘normal’. 

It was normal to be sad, to have a depressive episode here and there especially following a tragedy but it was the consistency that wasn't normal.

The feeling of emptiness that always felt like a shadow following you, the feeling of being the happiest you've ever been but still feeling that emptiness in the back of your head.

It was one of the things you both shared. Sometimes it wasn't a good thing. When both of you were in that state of mind it was hard to help each other, to be there for each other.

How could you stop someone from drowning if you're drowning yourself? 

But other times it was a good thing. You knew each other's signs, you two could pick up on the signs before the other person even realized that they were slipping, sometimes. It gave you time to either try and stop it before it went too far or just get prepared. 

This was one of those times Regulus knew he needed to prepare. 

He had seen you starting to detach for about a day now. Regulus knew this was going to be one of those episodes he couldn't stop, the kind where you were there physically but not mentally.

You just were floating through your days, you were on auto pilot almost the whole day; you weren't really listening, hardly responded and if you did it was short.

Regulus preparing for this meant doing a few things, taking a few days off work, letting Sirius, Pandora and Barty know that he wouldn't be really available so that he could focus solely on you. Making sure your favorite foods were home and ready to encourage you to eat, having some of your favorite movies, books, everything and anything accessible in case you were in the mood to do anything or if you just wanted to try and distract yourself for a while.

It also meant mentally preparing himself to be understanding and patient since it wasn't exactly his strong suit but he'd do anything for you. 

When an episode fully hits it isn't always you wake up and start to feel depressed. Sometimes you would be fine most of the day and then suddenly you were hit with a wave of nothingness.

Most of the time nothing would trigger it, nothing would happen, your brain would just decide that it was time to be sad, to be numb, you guessed.

“Mon Amore, would you like to eat something? You can have anything you want.” Regulus touched the side of your face and brought you out of your head. You just shook your head not really looking at him. “No, thank you.” You whisper.

He just nodded and sat next to you. He knew when to pick his battles and since you ate that morning he knew this shouldn't be the hill he dies on. 

The rest of the night was spent mostly silence with a few words exchanged here and there, Regulus was there ready and willing to do whatever you needed him to do to make you feel better.

He got you to eat a little eventually and you shared a shower with him. He had helped you wash yourself since you didn't have any motivation or energy to do so. 

By the end of the night you were both cuddled up in bed while Regulus ran his hand up and down your back just to let you know he was there.

He liked when you knew he was there, he felt like it helped even just a little, especially to make you feel a little less alone.

Eventually you broke the silence with a sight. “I'm sorry.” You felt regulus's hand stop moving, he stayed silent for a moment.

“Why are you apologizing? You haven't done anything.” By the sound of his voice you knew he was frowning, he knew exactly why you were apologizing but a part of him was hoping, praying, that he was wrong.

“For being this way. You shouldn't have to deal with this. We're not kids anymore, I should be over these feelings by now.”

Regulus sat up, making you sit up in the process, reaching over to the lamp on the bedside table turning the light on. “Do you choose to feel this way? Do you make the conscious decision to feel like this?” Regulus was looking you in the eyes with raised eyebrows waiting for a response.

“Not necessarily, but-”

“Exactly, you don't. You can't control your emotions. You didn't ask to feel this way nor do you choose to. There's no point in apologizing for something that you have no control over. Your brain is amazing and beautiful but sometimes it isn't the nicest to you and that's okay. Do you know why? Because even if your brain is mean sometimes it still makes you who you are and you're so amazing, mon cœur. We’ll take care of this together like we always do. It's going to be hard sometimes but it is not impossible, and I'll always be here with you every step of the way, because I love you more than anything, tu es ma raison de vivre, mon amour.”

Regulus cupped your cheek and whipped a few tears you didn't know you had shedded. All you could do was whisper a ‘thank you’ as you threw yourself in his arms. 

You fell asleep that night in Regulus’s arms while he whispered sweet nothing to you.

You weren't better by any means but you felt loved, you felt understood. You knew that no matter how hard things got, Regulus would be there for you, every step of the way.

⨯ . ⁺ ✦ ⊹ ꙳ ⁺ ‧ ⨯. ⁺ ✦ ⊹ . * ꙳ ✦ ⊹

[the-bonfires-ember]

if you are gonna claim that when you describe your abusers as 'Narcissistic' abusers that you arent stigmatising NPD im gonna need you to reevaluate how you are using that word.

because from what ive seen theres big trend in abbreviating 'narcissistic mother' to 'Nmother' or something like that and i gotta say adding a capital N is fucking weird and definitely leads to an assumption that you are talking about someone with NPD because yknow, its only capitalised like that when its written down in the context of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

but regardless of that, if you cant hear someone tell you 'hey, you shouldnt use that word like that, it stigmatises a mental health disorder' and then reply with "yOuRe InVaLiDaTiNg My TrAuMa/YoUrE gAsLiGhTiNg mE So YoU aRe A NaRcIsSiSt ToO" or all of that - which, ftr I have seen someone do - maybe you arent as empathetic as you like to think you are, which makes you no different from me.

actually, i lie. it makes you WORSE then me because at least i am able to listen to people tell me that im hurting someone and correct the behaviour without taking it like a personal attack.

and to the people that are like 'oh it meant this BEFORE NPD even became a diagnosis so its not actually a problem'. WRONG. before NPD, it meant self centred and admiration of onseelf. thats what the narcissus myth was about. he fell in love with his reflection and died staring at it. then Byron was like, maybe lets throw egotistical nature into it too. so now that was a part of it. Freud did as Freud does and made it a sex thing but thats fairly irrelevant. the first proper case study was in 1925 and the book that propelled it into public consciousness was published in 1979 and he was basically just complaing that the world was different to the 50s. But it was only when bloggers and social media bitches started using it that manipulation became a part of the definition of the word. so fuck off with that shit.

besides, given how the words meaning has changed so much even in just the last century, how can you possibly argue that we cant change it now to be more considerate to Narcissists who just want to stop being stigmatised?

narcissistic abuse is not real. you mean emotional abuse or just abuse at all, you dont need a fancy word for it, because it the basic boring standard of abuse to begin with. its not special because it came from your parents or whatever. its just abuse and i went through it too.

the only reason you arent a narcissist and i am is because you got lucky and i didnt.

stop making it worse and just listen to us ffs

[ninyard]

Hii, I guess this is a question not only for you but also your followers. Why wouldn't it be ok to like aftg? Like I've seen people say is problematic? But the only thing I've seen criticized is how unrealistic it is and like is a book so... idk maybe I lack critical thinking on some topics so if anyone could point me where to look I'd love to keep liking these books while being aware of it's failings :3

this is an interesting question! i guess the biggest part of whether it wouldn't be "okay" for someone to read aftg would be somewhat down to personal tastes.

re: the unrealistic part, i think if you go into a lot of books expecting them to be "realistic" you'll probably find there's a lot out there that just... isn't. i myself think that 90% of the biggest arguments i've seen about it's realism are from people who 1) refuse to suspend disbelief for the sake of enjoyment or 2) go into it with a certain expectation as to how realistic it's going to be before reading.

you can pick apart a million different books and movies and tv shows out there and find "unrealistic" parts in them all. and what do people say is even unrealistic about it? the different languages that are spoken in it? the trauma all the characters have? i understand it, to some degree, but i think people who think that fiction that is unrealistic = fiction that is bad, are probably just reading the wrong things. and that's fine. it's personal taste. but not everything has to be realistic for someone to enjoy it. that's just me.

as for the problematic aspects of it, i guess my gut instinct is to say that's once again down to personal perspective and opinion. i personally don't like or agree with some things in it, but i don't know if i can definitively say, oh it's problematic for this reason or that reason. are there triggering topics in aftg? are there uncomfortable scenes and problematic things that the characters do and say? are there bad people who do bad things? yes. that's just the truth. does that make the books themselves inherently problematic? i don't think so. but maybe i'm wrong with that. i don't know.

if you try to justify and explain and dissect everything that happens or is said in a book like aftg, i think you can probably find yourself in a real rabbit hole of is this appropriate? is this okay? is this problematic? i just feel that, it's a book, that has shitty things said and done in it, and it's up to you yourself whether you think those shitty things cross the line of being problematic or not. there's limits to everything, and while i dont think aftg crosses those limits, it doesn't mean i think it's perfect or an exception to criticism.

i guess what i mean is that if you try to find things wrong with aftg, you'll probably find something. it's not perfect. you could pick it apart if you really wanted to. but i suppose i'm just happy enough to enjoy it without doing that because it is what it is. it's a book about people who have had shitty things happen in their lives, about people who say and do shitty things, but i don't think it glamorises or makes those shitty things okay. me liking the series also doesn't mean i'm 100% a-okay super cool with everything that happens in it either. i am not the media i consume or enjoy.

but it's also really important to listen to people who talk about things that do personally hurt them or make them feel like they're not seen for who they are or what they've been through. i can say that i personally am not offended or hurt by 99% of what happens, but that doesn't invalidate someone who was. that doesn't invalidate other people who aren't me who say "it's problematic for x reason". i'm happy to share any insights into this if anyone wants to send them my way!

maybe this isn't a good answer to your question and i'm still not sure if i've gotten my point across properly. there's a million things problematic about aftg, i guess, but it's just about where you draw the line between the problematic content inside the series, and it maybe being a problematic series from the outside. i don't know exactly where to point you towards to have a balanced understanding of why it might be okay vs not okay. i'd just say to keep an open mind and listen to what people say when they raise their concerns about it.

[kateeorg]

Please tell me I'm not the only one who thinks "Magneto was right" is bullshit? And really dangerous rhetoric to be spreading? I'm not really an X-Men fan, so maybe my opinion is invalid, but... (a venting rant, please ignore unless you are curious, not judgmental)

Look.

It's one thing for Magneto to be right within the universe of X-Men -- any X-Men iteration -- which gives a lot of evidence that the humans of that universe WON'T change and WILL see mutants dead before they are accepted.

Fine. Whatever.

But considering how so many see X-Men as a reflection of real world issues... we're really going this route? We're really saying violence and war is the only option?

Because people WILL map this onto real-world issues that they really shouldn't be. But the real world isn't a comic book. The conflicts are not oversimplified, and the "oppressed" and "oppressors" aren't always as clear as people think. More often, there is real hurt on both sides, and multiple facets the news can't capture.

Sometimes, both sides are violent assholes. And they will hold on to their rightness, to their feelings of being the only "oppressed" ones, to justify horrible things.

And who gets caught in the crossfire? We do. Ordinary people just trying to get by.

And the other thing is, violence and extremism makes for a better story, doesn't it? Better comics, better photos, better news readership. Peace... real peace is hard. It doesn't photograph well, like protest does. It needs to constantly be maintained, constant compromises. It doesn't make for a good movie, does it? Not a superhero movie, anyway. Or TV show.

It requires a maturity that most people? Will never reach.

Including the writers.

So screw your "Magneto was right". Maybe I'm wrong. I probably am! I'm probably letting my emotions about real world events get in the way. I don't like conflict or picking sides by nature, even when it's justified, and some will see that as a weakness of my character. Fine.

But I'm sorry, I just ... I refuse to accept that. Because I worry who is going to use that phrase as a rallying cry in the real world. And who will get hurt as a result because someone decided they "deserved" that.

This is also why I'm frankly not excited to bring the X-Men into the MCU. Because where there are X-Men, irrational hatred must follow, and I just... I don't want to see the MCU devolve into that. It will, of course, the die has been cast, but... I'm sad it came to that, because I'm not sure I trust the MCU writers as things stand to get this right.

In a world of superheroes and flying ships, the thing that takes real imagination is to see a world where peace is possible.

I'm not sure I'll ever have the writing chops to do it myself. But I endeavor to try harder than the X-Men writers clearly ever have.

Actually, I think Wonder Woman said it best: "It's not about deserve. It's about what you believe. And I believe in love."